Crushing my opponent in the Debate Forum-Ron Paul Media Bias

For those of you not totally familiar with ATS, they offer a "debate forum" in which ATSer's may participate.

I'm doing my first debate and the subject is:Ron Paul and the Main Stream Media; Fair Treatment? NO!!,

I thought I would make this known to the many Dr Paul supporters who may wish to read/view this. Initially, I was going to ask for input from other Dr Paul fans to help me make this arguement. It turns out, my opponent is weaker than I thought and this is obviously, a very hard counter-arguement to make.

Feel free to read it and it's found here: www.abovetopsecret.com...


Go Ron Go!

It does not look to me as if your oppent is weaker thatn you expected, it does however seem as if you chose an obviousy one sided subject to debate and then chose the easily defended posistion.

THIS was one hell of a way to close the 2nd post!

As you can see nyk537, even the CSM has distorted the facts. I hope you bring something actually worthwhile in your next response or I'll simply "call it quits" on this debate and ask the mod's/judges to render a decision based upon your incompetence to actually post anything meaningful.

NEXT!!!

reply to post by mileysubet

Did you actually read his reply? Or my followup? Sure he took on an impossible arguement to fight against, but that was his choice. Problem is, everything he used in his followup is either inaccurate or helps to FURTHER my point!

The guy talked smack saying-

I'll take this opportunity to issue an open challenge to any fighter on ATS. I'll debate anyone, anytime, about anything. Just let me know and we'll get it arranged.

and so I responded.







Go Ron Go!

reply to post by freedom12

Crushing my opponent in the Debate Forum-Ron Paul Media Bias

It turns out, my opponent is weaker than I thought

Urgh, what a dumb thread.

I'd hazard a guess and say, because you made this public thread, that you now realize he's actually much stronger than you first thought and this is just some pathetic attempt to undermine him. I mean to actually say you're "crushing" someone when right in the middle of a debate is just silly and childish and yeah it makes it seem like you're on the backfoot and desperately clutching at straws.

That's how it reads anyway.

What ever happened to actually having some respect for a debate opponent as well - especially when posting in the debate forum, a forum for genuine, intelligent, debate? Sheesh.

Originally posted by freakjive
THIS was one hell of a way to close the 2nd post!

As you can see nyk537, even the CSM has distorted the facts. I hope you bring something actually worthwhile in your next response or I'll simply "call it quits" on this debate and ask the mod's/judges to render a decision based upon your incompetence to actually post anything meaningful.

NEXT!!!

Love it freakjive!!

Thanks for taking the time to read it. I'm dying to see his followup.






NEXT?? South Carolina! Go Ron Go!!

I haven't read too many debates so don't know the usual tone they take. And I'm not trying to be snide or critical or anything like that.

But honestly, you are coming across as rude in the debate forum and really rude in this thread by not even waiting for the debate to be over before you bash your opponent.

You might be the nicest person I'd ever meet in real life but here and the debate thread not so much.

Good luck to both you AND your opponent.

reply to post by Rising Against
Everyone is entitled to their opinions Rising Against.

As for whether I thought he was stronger than I thought, well, I hope you're joking?

Just thought I would post a link so other Dr Paul fans could read the debate.






Maybe Dr Paul knows? Of course he does!!

reply to post by freedom12

As for whether I thought he was stronger than I thought, well, I hope you're joking?

Not in the slightest and that's solely because you made this thread - It really does look like you're clutching at straws and are in a desperate position here. Whether that's what's really happening is another matter, but that's how you're coming across. And it looks like you're just trying to undermine your opponent instead of attempting to win with nothing but words, as it should be in a debate.

The way I see it if you really thought you was winning you would continue to concentrate on the debate and see it through to the end, not take your eye off the ball and behave like this. With all due respect but it's pathetic really.

Put yourself in the position of your opponent.. how would you like it if they created a thread and proclaimed their "crushing" you.. I'd hazard a guess and say you wouldn't be too happy with it at all really.

Originally posted by Rising Against

Always the voice of reason, RA.

I have to admit though, I sort of like the jib-jab kind of banter when it comes to a debate. I've not attended an ATS debate before so I don't know the normalcy here. However, with the way the Semper describes them on the shows and how he's got an unbeaten record, etc....I thought this was just par for the course.

Either way, I have to realize as well that I'm going to have some bias when reading because I'm such a huge supporter of RP and his campaign. Gah!!

You've caused me to think, RA - You're good at that!

Originally posted by semperfortis
The topic for this debate is; Ron Paul has NOT been treated fairly by the Main Stream Media

freedom12 will be arguing the PRO position and will begin the debate.
nyk537 will be arguing the CON.

Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.

. . .

Opening and closing statements must not contain any images and must have no more than 3 references. Video and audio files are NOT allowed.




You lost the debate in your first post by not following the debate rules. At least in MHO

Put yourself in the position of your opponent.. how would you like it if they created a thread and proclaimed their "crushing" you.. I'd hazard a guess and say you wouldn't be too happy with it at all really.

reply to post by Rising Against



I'd have no problem with it at all. I answered his challenge in the Debate thread BECAUSE it seemed he was a little cocky. That's fine by me(cockiness) as I think a good debator should be cocky/confident.

Originally posted by randomtangentsrme
Originally posted by semperfortis
The topic for this debate is; Ron Paul has NOT been treated fairly by the Main Stream Media

freedom12 will be arguing the PRO position and will begin the debate.
nyk537 will be arguing the CON.

Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.

. . .

Opening and closing statements must not contain any images and must have no more than 3 references. Video and audio files are NOT allowed.




You lost the debate in your first post by not following the debate rules. At least in MHO

I had wondered about that.

reply to post by freakjive


To be honest I was reluctant about posting in this thread, but honestly, I'm really surprised someone would do this - I mean It's obviously not in jest as far as I can see, if it was there would be no problem at all. Like you say, It's all part of the fun of debating.

But I thought people here were supposed to be better than this kind of behavior though - Sure, they may disagree with their opponent, but to claim their "crushing" them and to do it right in the middle of a debate when both are still posting their arguments is just stupid really, in my opinion it is anyway. I like to think we're supposed to be better that stuff like that.

I think It's also worth pointing out to the OP that the topic of the debate is almost irrelevant... in the debate forum you're judged on how you argue, not what you argue.

reply to post by angrymomma
If I broke the rules, it wasn't intentional. If I lose because of a technicality, so be it. I have went back and read the rules since posters in this thread made me aware of it.

As the mod says at the start of the debate, there was a technical issue, which was the Mod had failed to unlock the debate thread to me. I had made my first post and it wouldn't post , so I lost it. I then had to hastily remake the "first" post you now see in the thread. Hopefully, this will be taken into consideration.

The first response sounded like a typical layer's train of thought. Trying to dismiss the most obvious definition of "fair treatment" as in time on air and delving into the semantics of what "fair treatment" entails. Which they didn't seem to give any insight on.

Also, the fact that your opponents argument that the non MSM coverage makes up for the lack of coverage from the MSM almost destroys his chances by accidentally agreeing that Paul has not been given the same amount of air time/content on the MSM.

Your opponent has a point with the definition of "fair treatment" not being limited to air time but also content, but I think this will hurt them rather than help due to the amount of editing for the purpose of ridicule against Paul.

So far I'd give you the win based of content and not trying to "beat around the bush" However this is only the first response.

Have to agree with RA on this.

Isn't the debate supposed to take place within the debate thread? I can't see any point to this thread other then ego boosting. I'm pretty sure your not supposed to declare that you have crushed your opponent before the debate is even half way finished.

At this point even if you do win you will have lost in spirit

Edit because I need to bite my tongue.